Smith v. Mims et al

Filing 16

ORDER denying 15 Motion foe expedited screening signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 9/19/2014. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

CLEVELAND SMITH,

9

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION FOR EXPEDITED SCREENING
[Doc. #15]

Petitioner,

7
8

Case No. 1:14-cv-00841-LJO-GSA-HC

v.
MARGARETTE MIMS, Sheriff,
Respondent.

10
11
12

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus.

13

On August 18, 2014, Petitioner filed a motion to expedite proceedings in the pending petition

14

for writ of habeas corpus. As Petitioner correctly states, the instant action is pending before this

15

Court. However, the Court does not have an expedited calendar. Petitioner is advised that the Court

16

acts to resolve all pending cases in the most efficient manner possible. The Court is aware of

17

Petitioner’s pending petition. Nevertheless, the Court’s docket of pending cases is substantial, and the

18

Court must act first on those matters that have been pending the longest.

19
20

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion to expedite the pending
petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.

21
22
23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 19, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28
1